Sandy Di Martino

The accused, Rebecca Brown, was sentenced for multiple drug trafficking offences (fentanyl, methamphetamine, cocaine), firearm possession, flight from police, and breaching various court orders.

The court considered aggravating factors including her extensive criminal history, the serious nature of the offences involving dangerous narcotics and a firearm, and multiple breaches of court orders.

Mitigating factors included her guilty pleas, lengthy history of addiction, and serious diagnosed mental health issues (schizophrenia, severe depression).

The Crown sought an 8-year sentence, while the defence sought 7 years.

The court imposed a global sentence of 7 years imprisonment, less 772 days pre-sentence custody, resulting in a net sentence of 1,783 days (approx. 4.88 years).

Ancillary orders included lifetime and 10-year firearms prohibitions, a secondary DNA order, and a 3-year driving prohibition.

The accused was charged with multiple serious offences including armed robberies with firearms, forcible confinement, conspiracy, and weapons offences.

After being released on bail twice with sureties, the accused allegedly breached the curfew condition of her recognizance.

The original surety revoked her bail, resulting in the accused being arrested on breach charges.

The Crown opposed release on primary, secondary, and tertiary grounds.

The court granted release on a new recognizance with the same surety, finding that the bail plan was reasonable and had previously succeeded, and that the tertiary ground did not justify detention despite the serious nature of the charges.

The Crown appealed acquittals for impaired driving and operating a motor vehicle with blood alcohol exceeding the legal limit after the trial judge excluded breathalyzer evidence under ss. 8 and 24(2) of the Charter.

The trial judge had concluded that the police officer should have delayed administering the roadside screening device due to the possibility of recent drinking and residual mouth alcohol.

The appellate court held that the trial judge erred in law by requiring the officer to inquire about the timing of the last drink and by finding a reliability concern where the evidence showed a delay of at least twenty minutes between the last drink and the test.

The court further held that even if a Charter breach occurred, exclusion of the breath evidence was unwarranted under the Grant framework.

The acquittals were set aside and a new trial was ordered.